91-year-old woman charged over 260,000 Auschwitz deaths

Let's see if I've got this right. A 91 yo woman was a communications officer at the end of WW2 for 3 months and she's being charged because of that, right?

Even though elections in Germany had been suspended before she got to high school? You have a choice?

Applying today's societal logic to a person living in 1944's Nazi Germany is ridiculous.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: ~Lucidity

It's best we forget it ever happened, right? So history has an even better chance to repeat itself.

Seventy years ago, or seven hundred years ago...Events like this should never be forgotten. Ever.

That is NOT what I said. Put your words in your own mouth.

My entire family survived the camps and some later got accused of BS. Some people need to get the f*ck over their irrational quest for vengeance already. And that has NOTHING to do with remembering OR forgetting.

And again, like I said, a lot of people around this world today better pray the same doesn't happen to them one day. This kind of vengeance.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: Vasa Croe

She was in the SS...in 1944....you think she didn't know what was going on in a death camp that she worked at for 3 months?

It could be she was never in the death camp. There were three Auschwitz camps two were forced labor and the other was the death camp. So it's very possible she never stepped foot in the death camp. These "Nazi hunters" are just using peoples ignorance of those facts to be able to keep charging people with murder.

Ha..I almost spat my gatorade on myself. Wait....so you are all for giving forced labor camps the go ahead? Awesome.....let's start rounding up the illegals! No need to pay them anymore and it is all good as long as they are not death camps.

So it's ok to charge a person for working in a labor camp for the deaths of people she had nothing to do with? So you have no problem with people being falsely accused? So much for justice.

I'm basing my stance from the story that the prosecutor has ample proof of her involvement. Where are you getting your falsely accused stance from?

Have they shown any proof that she actually killed anyone? If not then she shouldn't be charged with killing anyone.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Not trying to take anything away from the holocaust victims but how can one person be responsible for 260,000 deaths? She must have been really busy during the time period the holocaust took place.

Then there is the mere fact that the woman is 91 years old and most lightly incapable of answering or being held to account for her crimes down to her mental and/or physical condition.

Why not prosecute Tony Blair or George Bush for there war crimes against humanity? Certainly makes more sense and is 100% more relevant to the age in which we live. The alternative i suppose is to wait until they are 90+ years old and then hold them to account.

a reply to: andy06shake

If they're guilty of them, yes they should be held to account.

a reply to: intrepid

If, and notice I said if, there is evidence that she committed/or aided in the commission of them? Then yes.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

My apologies then.

Vengence, or justice? Hard to tell the difference sometimes, isn't it?

Again, my apologies for hitting a nerve, it was not my intent...at least not to the degree I obviously did.

Sorry.

a reply to: seagull

Something to consider, 3 square meals a day, access to free medical and recreational facility's, access to TV and someone to keep them company 24 hours a day is far better treatment than most 91 year olds receive from there government.

If they really want to punish the woman they should stick her in an old folks home, now that really is some hard porridge.

a reply to: andy06shake

That had occurred to me.

I'm sure that some herein aren't going to believe me when I finish typing this...

But, it's not about punishment for her, it's about justice for the victims of state sponsored murder.

a reply to: seagull

If its not about punishment for her, then why hold her to account and punish her?

Waste of legal resources is my thinking. Far more pertinent crimes could be prosecuted imho.

a reply to: andy06shake

Punishment -vs- closure for the living victims, however many are left. Can't be many. All the former victims I know have passed.

If she's is, indeed, guilty then exposure of her deeds will, in my mind, be enough. Whether the prosecution agrees is something else entirely.

The flip side of this is if she's found innocent of any wrong doing, which is entirely possible after all, the remainder of her life is ruined...

...and there isn't a lot of justice there.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: sn0rch

She was 20 and lived in a death camp. You think they gave her a blackout hood, ear plugs and nostril plugs to go to work every day? There is no possible way she did not know what she was doing or what was going on there.

She was in the SS...in 1944....you think she didn't know what was going on in a death camp that she worked at for 3 months? She would have to be the most ignorant person on the planet.

Tell me what other War are people tracked who served in the Military and held accountable for every death? None. All Wars are atrocities.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: Vasa Croe

She was in the SS...in 1944....you think she didn't know what was going on in a death camp that she worked at for 3 months?

It could be she was never in the death camp. There were three Auschwitz camps two were forced labor and the other was the death camp. So it's very possible she never stepped foot in the death camp. These "Nazi hunters" are just using peoples ignorance of those facts to be able to keep charging people with murder.

Ha..I almost spat my gatorade on myself. Wait....so you are all for giving forced labor camps the go ahead? Awesome.....let's start rounding up the illegals! No need to pay them anymore and it is all good as long as they are not death camps.

So it's ok to charge a person for working in a labor camp for the deaths of people she had nothing to do with? So you have no problem with people being falsely accused? So much for justice.

I'm basing my stance from the story that the prosecutor has ample proof of her involvement. Where are you getting your falsely accused stance from?

Have they shown any proof that she actually killed anyone? If not then she shouldn't be charged with killing anyone.

Then why is Charles Manson in prison?

To add to this, yes I know Manson is a different beast, but he never killed anyone either. I don't have the details of this case, but am trusting when a prosecutor says they have enough evidence of wrongdoing for a trial that they actually do. So if it comes out that she was the one for 3 months that radioed the trains to pull into the station and gas the Jews, then would she deserve 260K years in prison, or just the 4 that most get.

Manson got consecutive life sentences for each of his "victims"....

a reply to: ugmold

It may seem like semantics to some...

But the Death Camps/Forced Labor camps were not war. It was state sponsored murder, nothing less.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

Justice... History is taught in every classroom, I should hope this name goes down in history for taking part in the death of 260,000 individuals.

originally posted by: ugmold

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
a reply to: sn0rch

She was 20 and lived in a death camp. You think they gave her a blackout hood, ear plugs and nostril plugs to go to work every day? There is no possible way she did not know what she was doing or what was going on there.

She was in the SS...in 1944....you think she didn't know what was going on in a death camp that she worked at for 3 months? She would have to be the most ignorant person on the planet.

Tell me what other War are people tracked who served in the Military and held accountable for every death? None. All Wars are atrocities.

Not sure, but I also don't recall when 8+ million of one ethnicity were singled out, rounded up and killed inhumanely in other wars....this one was particularly heinous....hence the tracking and being held accountable. I'd say many got off very light with little to no prison time, but hey...its only Jews right? /sarcasm

originally posted by: intrptr
Of course shes not guilty of all those deaths. Maybe of hiding her role there, though. Maybe of hiding that complicity, all this time.

Look at her pic in the article. Sitting there, arms crossed, jaw set in defiance, even now.

Thats why they are tasking her.

Yah, I'd like the whole US government brought up on war crimes trials, too.

How would you feel if the media were portraying you as a mass murderer and all you did was send messages by radio all day, she wasn't in combat, she wasn't gassing anyone.
This is ridiculous and is a rather vicious show of persecution complex. Have to keep that Holocaust front and center in the public eye regardless of who gets hurt doing so.
Destroy more lives - yeah that will make everything right

a reply to: Hijinx

By that logic the people back home who worked in the arms factorys that built the bombs both sides dropped on civilian targets are responsible for the 100,000s of civilians that perished during the bombing raids.

And Robert Oppenheimer and the rest of the people involved in the Manhattan project are also responsible for the 100,000s killed and/or susequent child mortality rate never mind the birth defects produced by bombing Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

If the woman is guilty be sure of this she is not guilty of killing the number of poor souls " they" claim.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals

originally posted by: intrptr
Of course shes not guilty of all those deaths. Maybe of hiding her role there, though. Maybe of hiding that complicity, all this time.

Look at her pic in the article. Sitting there, arms crossed, jaw set in defiance, even now.

Thats why they are tasking her.

Yah, I'd like the whole US government brought up on war crimes trials, too.

How would you feel if the media were portraying you as a mass murderer and all you did was send messages by radio all day, she wasn't in combat, she wasn't gassing anyone.
This is ridiculous and is a rather vicious show of persecution complex. Have to keep that Holocaust front and center in the public eye regardless of who gets hurt doing so.
Destroy more lives - yeah that will make everything right

But you are assuming that is all she did. Again, as I have said before in this thread, the prosecutor says there is enough evidence of her wrongdoing to go to trial. You are simply assuming she didn't do any of those things. I can assume she radioed for more Jews to be brought in to the gas chamber because they made room after the last train load the same way. My assumption would be more correct based on the prosecutor saying there is enough evidence of her doing something related to killing 260K people.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Hijinx

By that logic the people back home who worked in the arms factorys that built the bombs both sides dropped on civilian targets are responsible for the 100,000s of civilians that perished during the bombing raids.

And Robert Oppenheimer and the rest of the people involved in the Manhattan project are also responsible for the 100,000s killed and/or susequent child mortality rate never mind the birth defects produced by bombing Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

If the woman is guilty be sure of this she is not guilty of killing the number of poor souls " they" claim.

Very different actually. She was onsite....likely witnessed plenty of atrocities and based on the statements of the prosecutor there is evidence of her doing something more than just operating a radio that was related to 260K deaths at that camp in that period of time.